Author Topic: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?  (Read 75710 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Kyrillios Anthonios

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 117
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #405 on: April 25, 2015, 07:15:34 PM »
And me not providing you with the factually-existing Holy Canon has somehow changed the fact that I have stated HOW?

Or has proven me ignorant HOW?

Offline Mor Ephrem

  • A highly skilled and trained Freudian feminist slut
  • Section Moderator
  • Hypatos
  • *****
  • Posts: 36,107
    • OrthodoxChristianity.net
  • Faith: Mercenary Freudianism
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Feminist Coptic
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #406 on: April 26, 2015, 12:08:54 AM »
Michael Epstein?

Man, Charles Martel would hate me more than he already does if that was my name...
OCnet is KGB.
I hail Mor Ephrem as our Secretary General.

Quote
Oh you Greeks, you are all dumb!

An Athonite

Offline PeterTheAleut

  • The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
  • Hypatos
  • *****************
  • Posts: 37,280
  • Lord, have mercy on the Christians in Mosul!
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #407 on: April 26, 2015, 01:18:59 AM »
And me not providing you with the factually-existing Holy Canon has somehow changed the fact that I have stated HOW?

Or has proven me ignorant HOW?
You refusal to provide sources proves you stubborn. It doesn't prove you ignorant, but it certainly doesn't prove you knowledgeable, either. I guess that leaves us free to make our own assumptions.
« Last Edit: April 26, 2015, 01:26:46 AM by PeterTheAleut »
Not all who wander are lost.

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #408 on: April 26, 2015, 07:04:16 PM »
Christos anesti!
And me not providing you with the factually-existing Holy Canon has somehow changed the fact that I have stated HOW?
you haven't stated a fact. That hasn't changed.
Or has proven me ignorant HOW?
you continue to demonstrate that you cannot substantiate your assErtions.
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #409 on: April 27, 2015, 09:10:14 AM »
Quote
Isa and me doing the homework
C'mon man, you know how it is being a teacher  :laugh:

Quote
And me not providing you with the factually-existing Holy Canon has somehow changed the fact that I have stated HOW?
Because you played pin the tail on the donkey blind-folded, it just so happens that I grabbed your hand and led you to the right spot. It doesn't make you knowledgeable, it makes you lucky and me naive.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,926
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #410 on: August 27, 2015, 04:43:01 AM »
I know the subject and a lot more.  I'm going to show you something called "proof":





Wait for it.....

The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,926
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #411 on: August 27, 2015, 04:45:14 AM »
Michael Epstein?

Matthew Edwards?

Melanie Edelman?

_______ Mor Ephrem
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Stratopedarches
  • **************
  • Posts: 19,340
  • You're my guardian angel hiding in the woods
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Enemy State Orthodox Church Abroad
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #412 on: August 27, 2015, 05:26:10 AM »
I know the subject and a lot more.  I'm going to show you something called "proof":





Wait for it.....



You are eight years too late in your congratulations.
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline WPM

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,731
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #413 on: August 27, 2015, 07:23:31 AM »
How does Orthodoxy or Religion help you learn job skills and how to function in society? ...

Offline Marc1152

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 14,838
  • Probiotic .. Antibiotic
  • Jurisdiction: Rocor
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #414 on: August 27, 2015, 08:56:24 AM »
Michael Epstein?

Matthew Edwards?

Melanie Edelman?

_______ Mor Ephrem

I'll take a vowel for 500

Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm

Offline Marc1152

  • Hoplitarches
  • *************
  • Posts: 14,838
  • Probiotic .. Antibiotic
  • Jurisdiction: Rocor
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #415 on: August 27, 2015, 09:01:07 AM »
How does Orthodoxy or Religion help you learn job skills and how to function in society? ...

Patience
Humility
Helpfulness
Learn to do things that are personally hard for you
Learn to pray for and express mercy
Learn to pray for and express gratitude
Learn to pray for and express forgiveness
Learn to control greed
Learn to apply Golden Rule
Refine internet skills
 
Your idea has been debunked 1000 times already.. Maybe 1001 will be the charm

Offline primuspilus

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,990
  • Inserting personal quote here.
    • St. Gregory the Theologian Orthodox Church
  • Faith: Greek Orthodox (former WR)
  • Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of Boston
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #416 on: August 27, 2015, 09:03:12 AM »
How does Orthodoxy or Religion help you learn job skills and how to function in society? ...

Patience
Humility
Helpfulness
Learn to do things that are personally hard for you
Learn to pray for and express mercy
Learn to pray for and express gratitude
Learn to pray for and express forgiveness
Learn to control greed
Learn to apply Golden Rule
Refine internet skills
Classic.

PP
"I confidently affirm that whoever calls himself Universal Bishop is the precursor of Antichrist"
Gregory the Great

"Never, never, never let anyone tell you that, in order to be Orthodox, you must also be eastern." St. John Maximovitch, The Wonderworker

Offline ialmisry

  • There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
  • Strategos
  • ******************
  • Posts: 41,794
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #417 on: August 30, 2015, 01:20:32 AM »
How does Orthodoxy or Religion help you learn job skills and how to function in society? ...

Patience
Humility
Helpfulness
Learn to do things that are personally hard for you
Learn to pray for and express mercy
Learn to pray for and express gratitude
Learn to pray for and express forgiveness
Learn to control greed
Learn to apply Golden Rule
Refine internet skills
Marc already answered the original question. I'll just point that the original question was misplaced. "Man does not live by bread alone, but but on every word that comes from the mouth of God."
Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth

Offline IreneOlinyk

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 875
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #418 on: August 30, 2015, 03:36:18 PM »
How does Orthodoxy or Religion help you learn job skills and how to function in society? ...
Which society?  General society at large or the work force?  Or just the society in your local parish?

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,926
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #419 on: May 14, 2020, 07:16:51 PM »
I know this is an old thread, but I am going over the line of legitimacy in the Russian Church in America.

The highest authority within the Russian Church in America has been the All-American Councils, right? So for instance, a Council votes for the Metropolitan/Primate of the Metropolia. Then, when the American "Metropolia" was still under the MP, the MP (eg. Pat Tikhon) needed to approve the vote (eg. the election of Met. Alexander Nemolovsky in the 1920's)?

Is this the normal way that primates of metropolias are chosen in the MP? For instance, does a Metropolia's Sobor in Russia vote for its Metropolitans, and then the MP's Patriarch must approve the elected candidate?

In the OCA's article of the All-American Sobor (https://www.oca.org/history-archives/aacs/the-3rd-all-american-sobor) and on Ortho Wikia, I read that the Metropolia chose Met. Platon in the 1920's to succeed Met. Alexander Nemolovsky, and that it has been asserted that Pat. Tikhon approved Met. Platon's election, but that ROCOR disputed that Pat. Tikhon actually approved Met. Platon's election.

In case Pat. Tikhon didn't approve Met. Platon's election, where would that leave the Metropolia for the following decades? I would guess that it would simply mean that the Metropolia/Diocese was being run in practice by a local hierarch whom the Patriarch hadn't chosen, but so long as the Patriarch didn't take any countermeasures, the Metropolia and its bishops would not become illegitimate by this fact. It would be analogous to an (usually brief) interim period where one hierarch of a local church retires or is voted out but for whatever reason, a new one hasn't yet been formally approved by everyone necessary. The existence of an interim period like that would not mean that the local church became somehow illegitimate.

The Metropolia considered itself able to declare itself "autonomous" under the MP (despite a lack of permission from the MP) in 1924 on a 1920 Ukaz/Decree # 364 by Patriarch Tikhon and the MP's Holy Synod, which says in part:
Quote
2) ...if the Supreme Church Administration itself, headed by His Holiness the Patriarch, for any reason whatsoever ceases its activity, the diocesan bishop immediately enters into relations with the bishops of neighboring dioceses for the purpose of organizing a higher instance of ecclesiastical authority for several dioceses in similar conditions (in the form either of a temporary Supreme Church government or a Metropolitan district, or anything else).
...
10) All measures taken in places in accordance with the present instruction, afterwards, in the event of the restoration of the central ecclesiastical authority, must be subject to the confirmation of the latter.
I am not sure if the Supreme Church Administration in Russia totally and continuously "ceased its activity" in 1920-1924. Certainly, there were impediments. It seems like an important question.

Further, at some point in 1920-1945, the MP's Central Ecclesiastical Administration was restored, right? It seems that at this point, Paragraph 10 demands that all measures, like the OCA's and ROCOR's independent functioning, would become subject to the MP's Administration.

A claim has been made that the MP was not legitimate in the period when relations were broken with the MP because the MP had relations with the Soviet government, but this argument by itself is not convincing, for the reason that I read an OCA theologian give - that for instance just because Orthodox Local Churches were under Islamic states' domination, this did not deprive their administrations of legitimacy.

I guess that when in 1933, the MP excommunicated the Metropolia in the US, the Metropolia could make the argument that it was not a legitimate decision because, according to the argument, the decision itself could have been plagued and motivated by pro-Soviet concerns. In that case, you would have to get into the decision itself, considering what bases were given for the 1933 excommunication decision. I read in a plaintiff's brief (https://books.google.com/books?id=C6ZgmR7sBb0C&dq) that supposedly (according to the Plaintiff), the MP hadn't given the Metropolia prior notice or a hearing for the 1933 decision. So it seems like the Metropolia could contest the legitimacy of the MP's 1933 excommunication decision.

If you concluded that the decision was not legitimate or not canonical, this conclusion would not entail that either the MP or the Metropolia were illegitimate/uncanonical. You could say that you don't agree with the MP's decision that the Metropolia was uncanonical. In practice, it could be hard for a member of the OCA or MP to commune in each other's churches at that point though, depending on whether the OCA's or MP's clergy acted as if the OCA or MP were illegitimate.

I suppose that at this point it is generally a moot question because the MP has recognized the OCA's autocephaly and ROCOR's autonomy since 1970 and 2007, respectively.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2020, 07:30:07 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,926
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #420 on: May 14, 2020, 07:33:05 PM »
The Metropolia considered itself able to declare itself "autonomous" under the MP ... in 1924 on a 1920 Ukaz/Decree # 364 by Patriarch Tikhon and the MP's Holy Synod, which says in part:
Quote
2) ...if the Supreme Church Administration itself, headed by His Holiness the Patriarch, for any reason whatsoever ceases its activity, the diocesan bishop immediately enters into relations with the bishops of neighboring dioceses for the purpose of organizing a higher instance of ecclesiastical authority for several dioceses in similar conditions (in the form either of a temporary Supreme Church government or a Metropolitan district, or anything else).

10) All measures taken in places in accordance with the present instruction, afterwards, in the event of the restoration of the central ecclesiastical authority, must be subject to the confirmation of the latter.
It's Decree #362, which you can read here:
http://www.synod.com/synod/engdocuments/enuk_ukaz362.html

The MP had Local Councils/Sobors in 1917-1918, 1945, 1971, 1988, and 1990. The MP's Sobor is its representative administrative organ, so certainly the church's supreme authority existed at those points.
I take it that a Local Church's Sobor/Council is higher or equal to a Patriarch in terms of authority, since that would be the case when it comes to Ecumenical Councils.

Further, the "central ecclesiastical authority" does not seem to be the Sobor, but something more "central", with a smaller number of bishops, particularly the Holy Synod analogous to the OCA's Metropolitan's Council, right? Or would a "central ecclesiastical authority" refer to the Patriarch's own office? It seems to me more likely to refer to the Holy Synod of the MP.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2020, 07:43:34 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,926
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #421 on: May 14, 2020, 07:46:29 PM »
You can read the description of the MP's 1945 Sobor/Council in Russian here:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%9F%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BD%D1%8B%D0%B9_%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%80_%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D1%86%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%B2%D0%B8_(1945)
It chose Alexey Simansky as the Patriarch. Since the Sobor/Council of the MP is its highest authority for that local church, then it seems that if you accept its church's bishops' legitimacy, then Patriarch Alexey would also be legitimate as the MP.
« Last Edit: May 14, 2020, 07:47:04 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,926
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #422 on: May 15, 2020, 01:12:53 AM »
The World History Encyclopedia has this section on the Synod of the ROC's history in 1923-1943:
Quote
В 1923 г. прервавший деятельность Синод заработал опять. Однако давление правительства большевиков и ОГПУ на церковные структуры усиливалось, Синод едва мог работать и практически оказался в подполье, не имея к тому же гражданской регистрации. До своей кончины в 1925 г. патриарх пытался легализовать полнокровную  организацию Синода, однако это ему не удалось.

Тогда же церковь в качестве местоблюстителя патриаршего престола возглавил митрополит Крутицкий Петр (Полянский), однако фактическим руководителем ее стал заместитель Петра (с 1925 по 1937 г.) митрополит Нижегородский Сергий (Страгородский). В 1927 г. он, пойдя на сотрудничество с властью, добился от нее создания Временного патриаршего  Священного Синода. Легально тот просуществовал до 1935 г., фактически же – до 1937-го. Именно лояльный к советской власти Сергий, бывший с 1937 по 1943 г. местоблюстителем, стал новым патриархом. 8 сентября 1943 г. Архиерейский собор поставил его в этот сан. Также собор восстановил Священный Синод, ставший постоянным и получивший от И.В. Сталина здание для заседаний (Чистый переулок, 5).

TRANSLATION:
In 1923, the Synod, which had interrupted its activity, began again. However, the pressure of the Bolshevik government and the OGPU on church structures increased, the Synod could barely work and practically went underground, without having civil registration. Until his death in 1925, the patriarch tried to legalize the full-blooded organization of the Synod, but he did not succeed.

At that time, the church was headed by Metropolitan Petr Krutitsky (Polyansky) as the locum tenens of the patriarchal throne, but Metropolitan Sergius (Stragorodsky) of Metropolitan Nizhniy Novgorod became its actual leader. In 1927, he, having entered into cooperation with the authorities, obtained from the authorities the creation of the Provisional Patriarchal Holy Synod. Legally, it (the Provisional Synod) existed until 1935, but in fact - until 1937. It was Sergius, loyal to the Soviet regime, the locum tenens from 1937 to 1943, who became the new patriarch. On September 8, 1943 the Council of Bishops placed him in this position. The Council (ie. the 1943 Council of Bishops) also restored the Holy Synod, which became permanent and received a building for meetings (at 5 Chisty Lane) from I.V. Stalin.
https://w.histrf.ru/articles/article/show/sviashchiennyi_sinod_russkoi_pravoslavnoi_tsierkvi


Patriarchal Residence on Chisty Lane with the Administration of the Affairs of the MP

An article on the Provisional Synod of 1924-1937 is here: http://www.pravenc.ru/text/155436.html
It says that Pat. Tikhon created the Provisional Synod in 1923 and called it different things, including "Supreme Ecclesiastical Administration", which brings to mind the "central ecclesiastical authority" mentioned in Ukaz #362 of 20 November 1920 (I had earlier mistakenly dated the Ukaz to 1924). The article says that on March 1, 1924, Pat. Tikhon ceased the activities of the Provisional Synod "until further notice", due to lack of government registration of the Synod. The article also says that the Provisional Synod resumed work in 1927.

The article notes that when the Provisional Synod stopped its work officially in 1935, it viewed the role of issues that required conciliar decisionmaking to depend on Episcopal Councils. The first Episcopal Sobor/Council to take place in Russia after the Local Council of 1917-1918 in Russia was the Episcopal Council of 1943.

1943 Episcopal Council of the MP

The Wikipedia article on it in Russian (Архиерейский собор Русской православной церкви (1943)) is here:
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D1%80%D1%85%D0%B8%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B9%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B1%D0%BE%D1%80_%D0%A0%D1%83%D1%81%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D1%86%D0%B5%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%B2%D0%B8_(1943)
Such Councils continued in 1944 года (before the 1945 Local Sobor that chose Pat. Aleksey), 1961, 1989, and 1990.

In 1935, with the formal closing of the Provisional Synod, the position of the administration of the Provisional Synod was renamed the "Administration of the Affairs of the Moscow Patriarchate". Here is the Wikipedia article in Russian on the Administration of the Affairs of the MP (Управление делами Московской патриархии):
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A3%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B5_%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B8_%D0%9C%D0%BE%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B9_%D0%BF%D0%B0%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%85%D0%B8%D0%B8
Administrators included Protopriest Alexander Lebedev (1935-1937), Archbishop Sergius (Voskresensky) (1937-1941) and Protopresbyter Nikolay Kolchitskiy (1941-1960)

The MP's Patriarchs in 1923-1945 included Pat. Tikhon, then as Patriarchal "locum tenens": Peter Polyansky and Sergius Starogorodsky (who was Patriarch in 1943-44, chosen by the 1943 Episcopal Council), and then Patriarch Alexey.

The 1943 Episcopal Council reinstated the Holy Synod (officially dormant since 1935 and chose Sergius as Patriarch.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2020, 01:13:46 AM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline WPM

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,731
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #423 on: May 15, 2020, 10:16:42 AM »
Wow . . Looks like some interesting History.

Offline WPM

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,731
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #424 on: May 15, 2020, 10:21:26 AM »
How does Orthodoxy or Religion help you learn job skills and how to function in society? ...
Which society?  General society at large or the work force?  Or just the society in your local parish?

Local Texas.

Offline platypus

  • High Elder
  • ******
  • Posts: 713
  • The West knows best
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #425 on: May 15, 2020, 05:57:50 PM »
Thank you, Rakovsky! Almost all of that history was new to me.
I stare at the screen, my fingers gliding across the keypad. Uninformed opinions appear in neat rows of text. They are my own. "Click post!" Pride whispers gleefully into my ear. I obey without resistance.
Please disregard everything I say.

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,926
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #426 on: May 15, 2020, 07:57:40 PM »
Thanks, Platypus.
One thing that the discussions about the creation of ROCOR and the OCA as independent entities usually miss is that the 1920 Ukaz limited the time when they could be self-governing to the time when the MP's Provisional Synod ceased activity. So ROCOR and the OCA could choose to have independent governance in April of 1924, but not indefinitely, since it would be limited to the time when the MP's Provisional Synod started working again.

Pat. Tikhon created a list of three successors that was worded in such a way that it designated his successor as Metr. Peter Polyansky. Met. Peter took control of the church on Pat. Tikhon's death in 1925 as patriarchal "locum tenens", but then went into exile and prison until his death in 1937. Met. Peter's deputy was Met. Sergius Starogorodsky, who officially reinstated the MP's Provisional Synod in 1927.

I guess that if you wanted to challenge Met Sergius' Provisional Synod's validity, you could note that Met. Peter was in exile and thus not always informed and involved in the Synod's decisionmaking. I mean, if the Metropolitan of the OCA was indisposed and the Metropolitan Council made significant decisions without him knowing, it seems like you could question it. At least, you could appeal it on the basis that you wanted the Metropolitan to be involved in the decision.
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,926
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #427 on: May 17, 2020, 07:15:31 PM »
The article from the Canadian Orthodox History Project is suggesting that the MP served a Panikhida for Met. Platon of the OCA in 1946. Yet I also read that in 1947, the MP confirmed its 1933 excommunication of Platon.
Quote
After the repose of Metropolitan Platon, the ROCOR lifted its ban against the “Metropolia” as a goodwill gesture, and this led to a renewal in 1935 of relations with Metropolitan Platon’s successor, Metropolitan Theophilus (Pashkovsky).

On 19 April, 1946, Patriarch Alexei I (Simansky), listening to the request of the flock of the reposed Metropolitan Platon, blessed that a panikhida be served for the reposed metropolitan. Thus, from that moment on, the ecclesiastical ban against him was considered to have been posthumously removed.
https://orthodoxcanada.ca/Metropolitan_Platon_(Rozhdestvensky)#Break_in_communication_with_the_Moscow_Patriarchate.2C_1933
The Canadian Orthodox History Project article also suggests that one of two reasons for the 1933 excommunication was: Met. Platon's rejection of what supposedly was a loyalty oath (perhaps this was what the opponents of the "oath" labeled it) to the USSR that in substance supposedly said that the bishops who would sign the oath would not criticize the USSR. In The Russian Orthodox Church, 1917-1948: From Decline to Resurrection, Daniela Kalkandjieva writes: "On August 23, 1927, [Met. Evlogii in Western Europe] sent a telegram to Metropolitan Sergii, promising 'not to be involved in any political acts.'" She takes this to mean any political anti-Soviet acts, and she gives as an example the 1929 European ecumenical prayer for religious victims of persecution in the USSR, which Met. Evlogii ended up participating in. It would seem that the 1927 telegram was the kind of statement that Met. Sergius would have been been looking for from Met. Platon as well.
The second reason was: Met. Platon's insistence on the OCA's autonomy. Autonomy was something that the 1920 Ukaz # 362 of Pat. Tikhon allowed for until up to the reinstitution of the MP's Provisional Synod, which was certainly reinstated by 1947 - either in 1927, 1943, or 1945, depending on how you define reinstatement. Officially it was reinstated in 1927 for instance with Met. Sergius in control, but the locum tenens, Met. Peter, was then in prison or exile, so it seems debatable whether it could legitimately said to be recreated at that point. Later, in 1943, 1944 and 1945, there were increasingly larger MP Sobors held.

But the Orthodox Wiki article on OCA-ROCOR relations says:
Quote
In November of 1946, at the famous Cleveland Sobor (the "7th All-American"), after a call from Moscow for the Metropolia to renew its loyalty, a vote was held which resulted in the Metropolia's separation from the ROCOR and which declared loyalty to the Patriarchate. The voters, comprised of clergy and laity, voted 187 to 61 to reunite with the Patriarchate in the USSR.

The history of St. John's Cathedral in Mayfield, Pennsylvania, describes the 1946 severence of ties between the Metropolia and the ROCOR as a split within one body:

((In 1946, at the Cleveland Sobor, the Synod of Bishops of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside Russia indicated that the church headquarters would be moved to New York. A split then occurred in the American Metropolia, and the decision was by approximately half of the bishops to disassociate with the Russian Synod Abroad.[6]))
The five bishops which refused to submit to the vote at the council—which had not been ratified by a Bishops' Council as protocol dictated, probably because doing so would have ended up with a vote against ratification, as the Council majority was pro-ROCOR—then received a letter from Theophilus indicating their exclusion from the Metropolia.
https://orthodoxwiki.org/ROCOR_and_OCA#1935-1946:_Reintegration
The reference above to the protocol requiring a Bishops' Council to ratify the decision sounds confusing, because in the OCA, the highest authority is the All-American Council, not a council limited to bishops. This reference to protocol could be a protocol therefore in the agreements with ROCOR or else a ROCOR protocol, right? But supposing that it was a protocol in the Metropolia demanding bishops' ratification, then Met Theophilus' decision to expel the five dissenting bishops would make practical sense, although I don't know if it would be legally correct for him to expel them on the basis that they refused to submit to the vote. It sounds like they wouldn't have to submit to the vote because it wasn't ratified.

It's a weird issue, because the Metropolia would seem to have a legal right to break relations with the ROCOR if it wanted to rejoin the Mother Church (MP), even though the break would be in violation of its agreement with ROCOR. My guess is that this was the issue: the Metropolia at the All American Council voted and chose to rejoin the mother church and expelled the five ROCOR bishops for dissenting against the decision, even though the protocols demanded ratification for the vote to be effective somehow (like in terms of its agreement with ROCOR?).
« Last Edit: May 17, 2020, 07:16:01 PM by rakovsky »
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,926
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #428 on: May 19, 2020, 01:07:59 PM »
В книге Размышления о Церковной Традиции написано:
Quote
"Большинство епископов, клириков и мирян в России осудили Декларацию [мит. Сергия 1927 г.] и перестали возносить за богослужением имя митрополита Сергия."
In the book "Thoughts about Church Tradition", Fr. Pavel Adelgeim writes: "The majority of bishops, clergy, and laity in Russia condemned the Declaration [of loyalty by Met. Sergius in 1927] and stopped using met. Sergius' name in the liturgy."

I don't know if this is true, but it sounds realistic that at least the majority of bishops either condemned or didn't endorse the Declaration. In that case, I wonder what the implication is for Met. Sergius' and his synod's legitimacy. If (A) the primate of a Church and his synod run the Church, and (B) the primate (in this case patriarchal locum tenens Peter Polyansky) goes into exile or prison and has difficulty running the Church, and (C) his deputy (ie. Deputy of the Locum Tenens, Met. Sergius) makes a decision that most bishops and clergy reject and they stop commemorating him (ie. Met. Sergius), does this mean either: (1) that the Deputy loses his legitimacy as the church's head, or (2) that the synod loses its legitimacy?

It seems that the answer could be that until a synod is called that defrocks him, that he would not legally lose his legitimacy in the eyes of his Local Church, although he would lose his legitimacy in the eyes of the bishops who rejected his authority. It is worth noting that ceasing to commemorate a bishop (as happened in the case of Met. Sergius) is not the same thing as defrocking him.

The reason that the question is relevant is because of the question of the continuation of apostolic succession in the MP. The ecclesiology of the EO Church has the concept that there is an unbroken chain of succession where a legitimate bishop consecrates another. Met. Sergius was legitimately consecrated, but some bishops took the view that he lost legitimacy or they excommunicated him. In 1943, a Sobor/Council was called in Russia that chose him as the Patriarch. In 1945, Met. Sergius died and a new Sobor was called that chose Met. Alexey as the next Patriarch. Met. Alexey was consecrated by a legitimate bishop AFAIK, and leading catacomb bishops who hadn't recognized Met. Sergius came to recognize Pat. Alexey so any such issues with Met. Sergius' legitimacy seem to be separate.

ROCOR had rejected the legitimacy of the MP, but in 2007 they reconciled. If one finds ROCOR's rejection of the MP to be authoritative, then it follows that ROCOR also had the authority to give the MP back its legitimacy.

Fr. Pavel Adelgeim's book says that the dissident, catacomb bishops (called the "non-commemorators") took the view that Met. Sergius was usurping church management and violating canonical traditions. Fr. Adelgeim in his book takes the view that the Declaration was a new canonical order, ie a new system of church rules, but that it affected the church's management and not its Mysteries or Dogmas.

The audio-film Patriarch Sergius - Bloodless Martyr (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZjhHDrvaaBM) cites Fr. Adelgeim's book as above, and takes the view that Met. Sergius was acting like Abraham and his wife in the story in Genesis 12, where Abraham under the force of circumstances gave up his wife. Abraham said that she was beautiful and that the Egyptians would kill him and leave her alive, and so Abraham told her to say that he was her sister. There is a theory that she was in fact his sister (cousin? sister in law?), but anyway the main problem is that Abraham was allowing his wife to have extramarital relations with the Egyptians. The narrator of the film says that Abraham's decision was good only in relation to something else that was evil, and that this was a tragic situation for Abraham. The narrator, Alexander Shemetov, notes that St. John Chrysostom notes that the face of death was still scary at the time, because the anticipation of death was different in the period before Christ's resurrection. Abraham and Sarah and their family at the time were the Church, and they gave her up for dishonor, but Abraham saw himself justified in this, whereas in later times Met. Sergius wasn't treated as honored for his action, which was like Abraham's. The narrator theorizes that although Sarah was taken into Pharaoh's place, they didn't have sexual relations. The story goes in Genesis 12 that Abraham received animals as a reward, and that God afflicted Pharaoh, thereby showing His judgment.

The narrator asks how to live in this world - with Acredia - strict following of rules, or with ekonomia? Abraham in this case, if he had followed Acredia, would say that Sarah was his wife and not give her up, and then wait either for death or for God to help his family. Ekonomia on the other hand is a temporary, conditional leaving/apostasy of exact rules and canons of piety. You have to love the church so that it doesn't die in the desert. While you could chose simultaneously both death and life via God's salvation, suddenly it turns out like the story on the edge of the Temple, where the Devil tempted Christ, saying to Christ to jump because it says in the Psalms that God will save your foot from stumbling. The narrator says that we give people who imprecate the Church for agreeing with a godless authority the same answer that Christ gave the Devil. We say to them to accuse Abraham. He points to the Biblical verse that says that the one who curses Abraham is cursed by God.

The video quotes the philosopher Berdyaev who says that in Western Europe, in freedom, we can say nice things and can admire people who get shot for their beliefs, but that in Russia there are different conditions, and that Pat. Tikhon and Met. Sergey are not individuals who can just think about themselves, and that they should forget about their own purity and beauty and only say what is salvific for the Church. It is a giant personal sacrifice, and is the kind of sacrifice that Alexander Nevsky made when he rode to the Khans' Horde. Met. Sergius did all that he could to prevent the destruction of the episcopacy.
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline hecma925

  • Non-clairvoyant, but you can call me Elder
  • Stratopedarches
  • **************
  • Posts: 19,340
  • You're my guardian angel hiding in the woods
  • Faith: Truthful Chalcedonian Truther
  • Jurisdiction: Enemy State Orthodox Church Abroad
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #429 on: May 19, 2020, 05:14:19 PM »
May Patriarch Sergius pray for us.
Happy shall he be, that shall take and dash thy little ones against the rock. Alleluia.

Once Christ has filled the Cross, it can never be empty again.

"But God doesn't need your cookies!  Arrive on time!"

Offline rakovsky

  • Toumarches
  • ************
  • Posts: 11,926
  • St. Mstislav I
    • The Old Testament Prophecies of the Messiah's Resurrection and Orthodox Christianity's roots in the Holy Land
  • Faith: Christian
  • Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #430 on: May 28, 2020, 06:26:16 PM »
One question in my mind was what obstacles the OCA had with reuniting with the MP in 1946-1947. In The Orthodox Church, Thomas E. Fitzgerald writes that the Synod of the MP issued
Quote
a decree on 14 February 1945, that stipulated the conditions by which the Metropolia could be reconciled to its mother church. The essential portion of the decree indicated that the primate of the Metropolia would have to be approved by the patriarchate and that the bishops of the Metropolia would have to abstain from political activities against the government of the USSR.
https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-orthodox-church-denominations-in-america/

The decree of 14 February 1945 is quoted from on page 37 in the footnotes to Pat. Alexei's 1945 letters:
http://statearchive.ru/assets/files/Pisma_patriarha_1/1945.pdf

You can read the whole declaration in the entry for 1945, 14 February in the "Chronicle of Church events" here:
https://ruskline.ru/monitoring_smi/2008/06/09/letopis_cerkovnyh_sobytij_1945_god_n
and here:
http://blog.i.ua/search/?type=label&words=176315

Fitzgerald's book quotes from and summarizes the 1946 "Letter of the Five Professors" that was influential in the 1946 All American Council's decision to reunite with the MP with the status of a self-governing, autonomous part of the latter. Substantially the same chapter from his book can be found here in Thomas E. FitzGerald, The Orthodox Church Denominations in America:
https://azbyka.ru/otechnik/world/the-orthodox-church-denominations-in-america/7
The ocean, infinite to men, and the worlds beyond it, are directed by the same ordinances of the Lord. ~ I Clement 20

Offline WPM

  • Taxiarches
  • **********
  • Posts: 7,731
  • Faith: Orthodox Christian
Re: What's up with some in ROCOR over the OCA?
« Reply #431 on: May 28, 2020, 08:50:56 PM »
I remember 2006.